When it comes to Nygma's 5v8 series,

Eden <= Gila Mongers < Spy vs. Spy.

BWOW.

A decent spy spin-off, Eden emphasizes diplomacy and reaction.

Given the scenario start, it is possible that your first turn has two players close to your doorstep. The worry of teaming up persists during the match. Better to set up an alliance early than fall victim to it. One can be boxed in rather easily, with very little to counter. The board is set up to encourage this. I don't like that.

Ultimately though, patience is your ally, and the best approach to Eden seems to be: 1.) wait for someone else to make a mistake/get unlucky, and react. 2.) do not make yourself tempting for elimination. Knowing the odds helps. Unfortunately, I think "making a mistake" and "attacking" are close to synonymous. Lose an attack, and you're usually sunk. Win an attack, you have an enemy, and signaled to your neighbor that you're ripe for invasion on the non-attacking side, since you probably had to pull units from a defensive position to bomb up.

Fortifications within connected components work well. One can cut off an aggressors bomb quickly. Linking disjoint patches of troops is the most enjoyable part of the map.

When to break the center neutral is a game-long consideration. I like that too.

So, I've listed many defensive-minded strategies, which confirms my hunch that Eden is a less dynamic, wait-and-see type of game.

As the board fills in, the incentive to eliminate increases, yet one must spread out to win. This dilemma gives Eden a good amount of brain-racking strategy throughout.

And I like it a little more with each play- A grower and not a show-er.

Doom doom doom top that.

EDIT: Okay, real review. I think the map is tons of fun. Absolutely some psychology in this one, and serious planning is a necessity. As other reviewers mention, An unobservant player can spoil the game for all, but, you know, don't hate the game hate the player. Big advocate of using the risk engine to make games that play altogether different than risk, and this, along with spies, are Nygma's finest examples. Well done I say.

The bomb (factory). Dice can determine a few games early in a way that's hard to recover. But compact boards which minimize the fluff and maximize the funky stuff get the gold seal. I know there are plenty of strategies to pan out, but after a while, like so many scenario start 2 player games, an opening script emerges. The dice do a good job of mixing up the mid-game, and the endgame is always thrilling. Well done Cumby.

There's something about the simplcity of R'm S'm that I like. However a board should be influenced by luck and not a slave to it. Let the longevity of the map prove me wrong. I'm usually into these sorts of boards, just haven't had that game that's hooked me, yet.

EDIT: I've played enough games to tack on another star. Seems to be trend here. Not had that sensational match, but there is some schuck and jive in initial rounds.

Given the size, and game length, there is a huge return on investment, a credit to Nygma.

Theme tacks on a star.

A really fantastic map. Innovative use of capitals as endgame. Initial choices and neutral bashing determine the relative strengths of each player, then turn order and cards are crucial. If the board develops symmetrically, the games can be stale but never is there a stalemate. There will be some variation against the neutrals in the "race" part, but the combination of at most 18 units to place in the gate per turn, and 70 units total to break, there is time for the other two players to react.

3 legged race allows for many strategies, and sometimes it's best to modify your strategy midgame. While this can be said for any decent map, the decision making involved in unit allocation, and resulting inter-player dynamics that this creates, amplifies the best aspects of a 3 player match.

Nicely done.

EDIT: What? An average 0f 6.36?!?! This review needs a bump.

Of the Krock mobile boards, GOTT is another attempt at hashing out a good idea. I like it, but don't love it. There is also an incredible amount of unused items (territories) to the right of the board.

Levels are a nice touch, but it's

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.

EDIT: OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.

The occasional lopsided start is not enough to pull down my perfect review of a board with such replayability and strategy. Every game is a different puzzle. The rest is summarized nicely by Midnight's review.

EDIT: The frequency of lopsided starts is more than I'd like to see. However, there is a large disparity between perceived advantage and actual advantage when it comes to placement, and I've witnessed many games that start great for an opponent but can be overcome by sound play. That said, the handicaps happen enough to take a .51 star off my review. Then I rounded.

To my knowledge, this map was the pioneer of the "less is more, but not idiotic" philosophy that influenced many board designers. I don't care for it, but respect its place in history. Risky Kong Lite.